[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <5A585093-4E0D-49BC-A9CA-0072BB83A71C@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:50:21 -0700
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, bp@...en8.de, ak@...ux.intel.com,
mhocko@...e.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86: Fix stray A/D bit setting into non-present PTEs
Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net> wrote:
> +pte_t ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address,
> + pte_t *ptep)
> +{
> + struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
> + pte_t pte;
> +
> + pte = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, address, ptep);
> + if (pte_accessible(mm, pte)) {
> + flush_tlb_page(vma, address);
> + /*
> + * Ensure that the compiler orders our set_pte()
> + * after the flush_tlb_page() no matter what.
> + */
> + barrier();
I don’t think such a barrier (after remote TLB flush) is needed.
Eventually, if a remote flush takes place, you get csd_lock_wait() to be
called, and then smp_rmb() is called (which is essentially a barrier()
call on x86).
Regards,
Nadav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists